addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EXHIBIT 4-6: Uncertainty Example for Statistical Sampling, continued Monthly Composition Data o o o The facility collected one natural gas composition sample each month. For comparison with the annual average gas composition example above, the same composition values shown in Table 4-8 will be used. For this example, only one data point is available each month. Table C-2 (Appendix C) provides reproducibility uncertainty associated with natural gas samples. These values can be applied to account for the measurement error in each monthly sample. Note that the reproducibility uncertainty varies based on the mole % of each gas compound. The values are shown for January in Table 4-10. An additional 5% uncertainty is assigned by expert judgment to account for potential variability and bias in the gas composition during the month. The combined uncertainty is calculated by applying Equation 4-4, using the absolute uncertainties. The calculation is demonstrated for CH 4 . Results for January are shown in Table 4-11. U ( abs) = U ( abs) + U ( abs) U abs 2 2 Composition Re producibility Variability 2 2 ( ) CH = 0.15 + 4.5365 = 4.539 4 4.539 Urel ( ) = × 100% = 5.00% 90.73 Table 4-11. Measured Monthly Composition Data Reproducibility Uncertainty (abs), mole% Variability Uncertainty (U abs =mole%x5%) Combined mole% Uncertainty (rel) MW Calculation, lb/lbmole wt% Carbon Calculation, % wt% C U(rel) mole% dry January Methane 90.73 0.15 4.5365 5.00% 14.5531 60.71 6.49% Ethane 3.83 0.1 0.1915 5.64% 1.1517 5.13 6.99% CO2 3.69 0.1 0.1845 5.69% 1.6240 2.47 7.03% Propane 0.9 0.07 0.045 9.25% 0.3969 1.81 10.13% i-Butane 0.11 0.07 0.0055 63.83% 0.0639 0.29 63.97% n-Butane 0.14 0.07 0.007 50.25% 0.0814 0.37 50.42% i-Pentane 0.03 0.02 0.0015 66.85% 0.0216 0.10 66.98% n-Pentane 0.02 0.02 0.001 100.12% 0.0144 0.07 100.21% C6+ 0.03 0.02 0.0015 66.85% 0.0259 0.12 66.98% Total 99.48 17.9329 71.0717 Sum uncertainty (abs) 0.7404 3.9734 Sum uncertainty (rel) 4.13% 5.59% o As with the annual composition example, the molecular weight of the monthly composition is calculated by applying the following equation: 1 MW = × ∑ mole% × MW 100 = # compounds ( ) Mixture i i i 1 resulting in 17.9329 lb/lbmole, as shown in Table 4-11. Pilot Version, September 2009 4-27
EXHIBIT 4-6: Uncertainty Example for Statistical Sampling, continued o For each individual gas compound, the relative uncertainty of the mole%i × MWi is equivalent to the combined reproducibility and variability uncertainties since the molecular weight of each gas compound is a constant. The aggregated uncertainty associated with the mixture’s MW is calculated by applying Equation 4-1, using the absolute uncertainties for each molar compound. ∑ 2 U ( abs) = U ( abs ) ( MW Total ) mole% × MW ∑ 2 2 2 (0.0500× 14.5531) + (0.0564× 1.1517) + (0.0569× 1.6240) = + (0.0925× 0.3969) + (0.6383× 0.0639) + (0.5025× 0.0814) + (0.6685× 0.0216) + (1.0012× 0.0144) + (0.6685× 0.0259) 2 2 2 2 2 2 = 2 (0.7281) + (0 .0650) + (0.0924) + (0.0367) + (0.0408) + (0.0409) + (0.0145) + (0.0144) + (0.0173) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.7404 Urel ( ) = × 100% = 4.13% ∑( MW Total ) 17.9329 = 0.7404 o The weight percent carbon of the average composition is calculated by applying the following equation: Wt% C ∑ lbmole x lbmole C 12 lb C 1 i Total = × × × 100 lbmole total lbmolei lbmole C MWTotal This equates to 71.07% C, as shown in Table 4-11. o For each compound in the gas mixture, the uncertainty from this calculation is determined by applying Equation 4-6, using the relative uncertainties of the lbmole i and MW Total . This is demonstrated for the January CH 4 composition. Urel ( ) = Urel ( ) × Urel ( ) = 5 + 4.13 =6.49% 2 2 2 2 Wt % C i mole% i MW Total o The uncertainty associated with the wt% C of the mixture is calculated by applying Equation 4-4, using the absolute uncertainties for the weight percent carbon of each molar compound. ∑ 2 U ( abs) = U ( abs) ( %) Wt% ∑ wt 2 2 2 (0.0649× 60.71) + (0.0699× 5.13) + (0.0703× 2.47) = + × + × + × = + (0.6698× 0.10) + (1.0021× 0.07) + (0.6698× 0.12) 3.9724 Urel ( ) = × 100% = 5.59% ∑( Wt %) 71.0717 2 (0.1013 1.81) (0.6397 2 0.29) (0.5042 2 0.37) 3.9734 2 2 2 Pilot Version, September 2009 4-28
Page 1 and 2:
Prepared by the LEVON Group, LLC an
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents SECTION Page FORE
Page 5 and 6:
List of Tables SECTION Page 2-1 Ove
Page 7 and 8:
FOREWORD The global oil and natural
Page 9 and 10:
DOCUMENT AT A GLANCE This document
Page 11 and 12:
1.0 INTRODUCTION Policymakers use e
Page 13 and 14:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Clim
Page 15 and 16:
2.0 SOURCES OF UNCERTAINTY There ar
Page 17 and 18:
Table 2-1. Overview of Methods Used
Page 19 and 20:
the uncertainty associated with cur
Page 21 and 22:
d. Data processing uncertainty Typi
Page 23 and 24: d. Material Balance For some emissi
Page 25 and 26: 3.0 OVERVIEW OF MEASUREMENT PRACTIC
Page 27 and 28: 3.1 Flow Measurement Practices Cont
Page 29 and 30: All these factors should be assesse
Page 31 and 32: Table 3-1. Example of FFMS Combined
Page 33 and 34: 3.2 Uncertainties of Flow Measureme
Page 35 and 36: Table 3-3. Compilation of Specifica
Page 37 and 38: EXHIBIT 3-3: FACTORS TO CONSIDER WH
Page 39 and 40: 3.3.2 Quantifying Sampling Precisio
Page 41 and 42: Table 3-4. Summary of Selected Carb
Page 43 and 44: 3.5 Heat Content Determination The
Page 45 and 46: 3.5.2 Computational Methods Heating
Page 47 and 48: using standard methods, non-standar
Page 49 and 50: 0.6 0.4 0.2 Error 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6
Page 51 and 52: s ± t × (Equation 4-1) n where s
Page 53 and 54: 4.2.1 Propagation Equations There a
Page 55 and 56: For two terms that might be correla
Page 57 and 58: EXHIBIT 4-1: Uncertainty Example fo
Page 61 and 62: Further guidance for assigning unce
Page 63 and 64: 4.4 Quantifying Measurement Uncerta
Page 69 and 70: Are the data based on a single poin
Page 71 and 72: Two methods are compared. The first
Page 73: . EXHIBIT 4-6: Uncertainty Example
Page 77 and 78: Table 4-13 shows the uncertainty in
Page 79 and 80: Table 4-13. Comparison of Annual Em
Page 81 and 82: • The evolution of activity and e
Page 83 and 84: These guidelines concentrate solely
Page 85 and 86: (Reprinted from the API Compendium)
Page 87 and 88: Table 5-2. Onshore Oil Field (High
Page 89 and 90: associated with them are assigned b
Page 91 and 92: Table 5-4. Onshore Oil Field (High
Page 93 and 94: 5.2.4 Propagating Assymetric Uncert
Page 95 and 96: U( rel) = U( rel) + U( rel) + U( re
Page 97 and 98: Coke burn rate approach (Equation 5
Page 99 and 100: Wt% C ∑ lbmole x lbmole C 12 lb C
Page 101 and 102: The CO 2 emissions are calculated u
Page 103 and 104: GHG Emissions, tonnes/yr 60,000 50,
Page 105 and 106: vast majority of the uncertainty fo
Page 107 and 108: 6.0 REFERENCES AGA, 2008, Greenhous
Page 109 and 110: The Alberta Energy and Utilities Bo
Page 111 and 112: Appendix A GLOSSARY OF STATISTICAL
Page 117 and 118: APPENDIX B LIST OF INDUSTRY MEASURE
Page 119 and 120: Chapter 2.8B Establishment of the L
Page 121 and 122: Chapter 11.5.3 Chapter 12.1.1 Chapt
Page 123 and 124: Chapter 19.4 Chapter 20.1 RP 85 RP
Page 125 and 126:
ISO 8222:2002 ISO 8697:1999 ISO 902
Page 127 and 128:
ISO 7194:2008 Measurement of fluid
Page 129 and 130:
ASTM D4292 ASTM D4892 ASTM D5002 AS
Page 131 and 132:
APPENDIX C OPERATING CONDITIONS, IN
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix C OPERATING CONDITIONS, IN
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix D SELECT MEASUREMENT METHO
Page 137 and 138:
c. ASTM UOP539-97, Refinery Gas Ana
Page 139 and 140:
interference between known componen
Page 141 and 142:
maintained over the room temperatur
Page 143 and 144:
APPENDIX E UNITS CONVERSION
Page 145 and 146:
− Gasoline density (average) = 0.
Page 147 and 148:
Appendix F UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION D
Page 149 and 150:
The uncertainty for the heaters/reb
Page 151 and 152:
∑ 2 U ( abs) = U( abs) ∑(Wt%C)
Page 153 and 154:
Combining the fuel usage for the tw
Page 155 and 156:
Uncertainty Estimate of CO 2 e Emis
Page 157 and 158:
U ( abs) = ( U ( abs) + U ( abs) +
Page 159 and 160:
E E CO2e 219 tonne CO ⎛ 2 0.0108
Page 161 and 162:
E CO 2 6 500× 10 scf gas lbmole ga
Page 163 and 164:
• Fuel Economy (miles per gallon)
Page 165 and 166:
Upper: U ( abs) = (U( abs) +U( abs)
Page 167 and 168:
default CH 4 content is 5.53% from
Page 169 and 170:
Uncertainty Estimate of CO 2 e Emis
Page 171 and 172:
( ) Urel ( ) = Urel ( ) = Urel ( )
Page 173 and 174:
Uncertainty Estimate for CH 4 and C
Page 175 and 176:
specific mole % for CH 4 and CO 2 i
Page 177 and 178:
E CO2 0.07239 tonne CH 4 tonne mole
Page 179 and 180:
U ( rel) = U( rel) +U( rel) +U( rel
Page 181 and 182:
Table F-14. Fugitive Emission and U
Page 183 and 184:
U ( abs) = (U( abs) +U( abs) +U( ab
Page 185 and 186:
Table F-15. Onshore Oil Field (High
show all

addressing uncertainty in oil and natural gas industry greenhouse

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?